U.S. Judge Awards $480M in Attorney Fees in Landmark NCAA NIL Settlement

On July 24, 2025, U.S. District Senior Judge Claudia Wilken of the Northern District of California approved nearly $480 million in attorney fee awards in the House v. NCAA antitrust class-action litigation, a case that has reshaped college sports by securing $2.576 billion in compensation for college athletes’ name, image, and likeness (NIL) rights. The settlement, described as a “landmark” by lead counsel Jeffrey Kessler of Winston & Strawn, also allows schools to directly pay athletes up to $20.5 million per school starting in the 2025-26 academic year, marking a historic shift from the NCAA’s traditional amateurism model.

Background of the Case

The House v. NCAA settlement, along with related cases Hubbard v. NCAA and Carter v. NCAA, resolved three antitrust lawsuits filed in 2020 by plaintiffs including Arizona State swimmer Grant House and former college basketball player Sedona Prince. These lawsuits challenged NCAA restrictions that prevented athletes from earning compensation for their NIL and other athletic services, arguing that such rules violated antitrust laws in a multibillion-dollar industry. The settlement, initially approved on June 6, 2025, after preliminary approval on October 7, 2024, provides $2.576 billion in back damages for athletes who competed from 2016 to 2024 and eliminates NCAA rules prohibiting direct payments from schools to athletes.

The total value of the settlement is expected to exceed $20 billion over 10 years, including future revenue-sharing benefits, making it one of the largest antitrust class-action settlements in history. Approximately 389,000 current and former Division I athletes are eligible for payments, with football and men’s basketball players from Power 5 conferences likely receiving the largest sums, some in the six figures, while others, like swimmers or soccer players, may receive smaller amounts.

Attorney Fee Awards

Judge Wilken’s July 24 order granted $480 million in attorney fees and costs to class counsel, led by Jeffrey Kessler of Winston & Strawn and Steve Berman of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro. This amount covers legal work on the House and Hubbard settlements, with an additional $200 million allocated for the Hubbard settlement’s administration. The fees were deemed “reasonable” given the complexity and duration of the litigation, which spanned five years and built on prior victories, including the 2021 Supreme Court ruling in Alston v. NCAA that affirmed antitrust laws apply to NCAA rules.

Additionally, Wilken awarded service payments to class representatives: $125,000 each to Grant House and Sedona Prince, and $50,000 to former running back Chuba Hubbard, recognizing their contributions to the case. The attorneys are also eligible to apply for additional fees over the 10-year settlement period, potentially totaling $750 million, as they oversee the revenue-sharing model and third-party NIL deal enforcement.

Key Settlement Details

• Back Damages: The NCAA and Power 5 conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC, and Pac-12) will pay $2.776 billion over 10 years to compensate athletes for lost NIL opportunities since 2016.
• Revenue Sharing: Starting in 2025-26, schools can share up to 22% of their media, ticket, and sponsorship revenue (approximately $20.5 million per school, increasing annually) with athletes across all Division I sports.
• Roster Limits: The settlement replaces scholarship limits with roster size caps (e.g., 105 for football), with provisions to “grandfather in” current players to avoid immediate roster cuts.
• NIL Oversight: A third-party clearinghouse will review third-party NIL deals for “fair market value,” addressing concerns about booster-led collectives acting as de facto salaries. This provision faced scrutiny from Wilken for potentially restraining trade but was approved after clarifications.
• Title IX Concerns: Objectors raised concerns that the settlement’s damage distribution, with 90% allocated to football and men’s basketball players, could violate Title IX by disproportionately benefiting male athletes. Wilken overruled these objections, stating the settlement does not prevent schools from distributing future benefits in compliance with Title IX.

Legal and Social Impact

The settlement marks a seismic shift in college athletics, dismantling the NCAA’s century-long amateurism model. Since 2021, when NIL deals were first permitted, athletes have earned millions through third-party agreements, but this settlement enables direct payments from schools, fundamentally altering the economic landscape. NCAA President Charlie Baker called it a “tremendously positive change” but noted ongoing challenges, including unresolved questions about whether athletes should be considered employees.

Posts on X reflect mixed sentiment: some celebrate the financial empowerment of athletes, while others criticize the high attorney fees, with one user noting, “$480M for lawyers while athletes split $2.8B? Seems disproportionate.” Critics like Sam Ehrlich, a Boise State professor, suggest the settlement may push smaller schools out of Division I due to financial pressures, as seen with Saint Francis University’s decision to drop to Division III in 2026.

Ongoing Challenges

Despite final approval, the settlement faces potential appeals, with a deadline for objections or opt-outs set for January 31, 2025. Some athletes have filed separate antitrust lawsuits, and questions about employee status and state-level NIL laws remain unresolved. The NCAA has sought Congressional intervention to stabilize the system, but no federal legislation has been passed as of July 28, 2025.

For more details or to file a claim, athletes can visit www.collegeathletecompensation.com. The case continues to spark debate about fairness, equity, and the future of college sports.